Howard Linskey - The Dead

‘From a buccal swab taken following his arrest for drink driving.’

‘For alleged drink driving. The case has not been heard, so your comments could be deemed highly prejudicial, Professor. I’m afraid I must remind you that it is not down to you to decide upon a man’s guilt, in this case or any other. That is the preserve of the members of the jury.’

‘Then I apologise,’ replied the professor, ‘I understand the drink-driving hearing was postponed because your client is facing the rather more serious charges of raping and murdering a young girl.’

‘Everyone in this room is aware of the charges, Professor. What must be decided upon is his guilt or innocence,’ replied Aimes. ‘So, a buccal swab taken from the mouth of my client by the police and stored where exactly?’

‘It was taken to a laboratory in sealed conditions.’

‘To the Forensic Science Service lab?’ He asked the question lightly.

‘Well no,’ countered the professor, ‘the Forensic Science Service no longer exists. I’m surprised you weren’t aware of that. These days the analysis of DNA samples is conducted by private firms.’

‘Yes, of course, I apologise,’ answered Aimes, ‘how silly of me to forget that the government chose to save money by closing down the world-renowned, state-funded body that for many years conducted ground-breaking study and analysis into the DNA left at crime scenes, choosing instead to farm it out to little known, private companies whose main motivation is profit. Companies like DeoxyNuc Forensics, for example, whose much-criticised laboratory is in Birmingham. Now then, Professor, to which laboratory was the accused’s DNA sample sent?’

There was a pause long enough for the professor to realise he had been duped, then he answered flatly, ‘DeoxyNuc Forensics.’

‘In Birmingham?’

‘In Birmingham,’ confirmed the professor.

‘I see, and would this be the same DeoxyNuc Forensics, let us refer to them as DNF for the sake of brevity, who processed the DNA sample in the case of Andrew Cox.’

‘I believe they did process the sample in that case, yes.’

‘I’m not surprised you recall the case. It was thrown out wasn’t it?’

‘Yes.’

‘Andrew Cox had been accused of raping a fourteen-year-old girl in Glasgow on the basis of a DNA sample you said proved that he must have done it, because you were the expert witness on that case, weren’t you Professor?’

‘I was, yes, but I gave my testimony based on the information that was available to me at the time. All of the evidence indicated he was the man who raped that poor young girl.’

‘All of the evidence? You mean the DNA sample?’

‘Yes.’

Aimes paced up and down some more, making it appear he was thinking, but really he was building up the suspense levels. Even the jury seemed to sense he was going to hit Professor Harris right between the eyes at any minute.

‘But he wasn’t guilty, was he, Professor?’

‘No, it would appear not.’

‘Despite the DNA sample and your sworn evidence that he was? Professor, please explain to me why the case against Andrew Cox was eventually thrown out.’

‘It turned out that the DNA sample had been compromised.’

‘The DNA sample had been compromised? What does that actually mean ?’

‘It appeared that the tray used to analyse the DNA sample had been used before.’

‘Can that really be possible? A used tray was not disposed of, nor was it clearly marked as having been used, so when the DNA swab from the unfortunate rape victim was placed in the tray it was allowed to mingle with the residue from an earlier sample, in this case the DNA taken from Andrew Cox, following his arrest on suspicion of drink driving, which I need hardly add is an obvious parallel with the case here today. It’s all tragically similar; the same circumstances leading to the surrender of a DNA sample, the same incompetent company analysing that sample, and the exact same expert witness standing before us, confidently stating that it would be tantamount to an impossibility for the accused to be innocent. But Andrew Cox was innocent, wasn’t he, Professor, and so is Henry Baxter.’

The professor did not reply, so Aimes continued, ‘Professor, how many cases have been thrown out because of poor handling by DNF?’

‘I really have no…’

‘Twelve,’ interrupted Aimes, ‘it’s twelve; a dozen citizens of the United Kingdom who could have found themselves undergoing the terrible ordeal of a lengthy sentence behind bars because the practices at DNF are clinically unsafe.’

‘Yes, perhaps, but they were old cases, historic ones.’

‘Twelve errors,’ Aimes reminded him gravely, ‘twelve miscarriages of justice due to shoddy clinical practice. How can any of us honestly state, hand on heart, that Henry Baxter would not make it thirteen?’

‘But processes have been tightened up since then. The possibility of any kind of miscarriage of justice has been virtually eliminated now that there are a series of proper checks and balances in place at DNF.’

‘So you are certain of Henry Baxter’s guilt?’

‘Yes, yes. I would say it is virtually assured.’

Aimes smiled then and there was nothing fake or contrived about his pleasure. ‘You said that before, Professor.’

‘I said what before?’

‘That the accused’s guilt is virtually assured.’

‘What? No… I don’t think… I’m sure…’

‘Yes, yes you did, believe me.’

‘When?’

‘Two years ago when you were involved in the prosecution case against Andrew Cox. I’ve read the transcripts you see, every word of your testimony, and the phrase stuck in my mind. You said, “I would say the guilt of this man is virtually assured,”’ Aimes quoted, ‘but it wasn’t, was it Professor?’

Aimes had the good sense to keep Henry Baxter off the witness stand for all but a short denial of wrongdoing and a deep desire to clear his name. He had no idea why the police had arrested him, he said, but it was surely a mistake that would all soon be cleared up. Of course the prosecution tried to tear him apart, but a combination of Baxter’s own self-confidence coupled with a comprehensive briefing from Aimes on how to handle every question meant they rarely drew blood.

Julian Aimes summed it all up neatly at the end of the trial. The two girls were untrustworthy, the police incompetent and desperate for a conviction, and the prosecution’s expert witness had been wrong before.

‘The DNA evidence in this case is entirely unreliable,’ said Aimes, ‘it could have been caused by cross-contamination in the police station or a carelessly discarded tray, previously used to analyse the DNA of an entirely different person, as it was in a dozen other cases, all of which were potentially serious miscarriages of justice involving DeoxyNuc Forensics. If your faith in that company remains entirely undimmed then you might want to consider a guilty verdict in this case. If, like me, you feel slightly nervous at the prospect of entrusting a man’s life to a company that cannot even be bothered to rinse their trays out, then you should find my client innocent of any and all wrongdoing.’

The jury deliberated for less than a day before returning their verdict.

Not guilty.

Leanne’s father left the courtroom immediately.

Henry Baxter couldn’t help himself. As soon as he was released from custody he did exactly what I told him not to do. He strode right out of the front door and stood on the court steps, so he could address the Press — and how they loved it. ‘I stand here before you as a vindicated man but I have been through a terrible ordeal, made worse by the refusal of both the police and Crown Prosecution Service to consider any possibility of my innocence. However, I never lost faith in the British justice system, which is the finest in the world. I have been tried before a jury of my peers and found wholly innocent of the heinous charges levelled at me. I now leave the court without a stain on my character and wish to be left alone. I intend to take a long holiday and simply request you respect my right to privacy. As to the culpability of the senior police officers and CPS officials, who brought this travesty of a case to court at considerable cost to the taxpayer, I leave that for others to consider. Thank you.’